Interrogating The Big Question

In a recent online debate Professors William Deresiewicz and Mark Edmundson held a discussion about the current academic intentions of universities today. The discussion was entitled "The Academic-Industrial Complex". Since this question directly effected the lives of students i felt that it would be best to read some the opinions of my fellow students before making my own.

According Professor William Deresiewicz, the average college student is divided into two categories, "Thinkers" and "Leaders". A leader is a student who inserts himself into the institution and buys into their ideal and beliefs. "Thinkers" are the skeptics. They are the ones who question whats going on in the university. They do not buy in to what everyone else is doing unless they see it benefitting them self. According to Prof. Deresiewicz "Thinkers" are the true intellectuals.

WillPike, a student blogger, said that he doesnt think "thinkers" are bad for universities because they are the ones who promote growth and and make sure the university is growing, however i would have to respectfully disagree. The people who move the economy of the school are the one's who go in the direction the school has in mind. There is no doubt that in life we need thinkers to revolutionize the way we think but unfortunately thinkers can be so stuborn that they refuse to do things they feel would better an institution or government. Like William Dereswicz said, "its the universities job to make alumni". The alumni are the ones who will return to help better the community.

WillPike also talks about todays universities being a business, and agree with him to a certain extent. If universities were a business then they would not waste time hand picking students to attend there school nor hand out scholarships. Instead they would invest there time into advertising so they can obtain more money. Infact there would be no need for an actual campus, since its a business, it can be conducted online.

Shelby Lee Porter posed a strong argument when she said "the problem with the idea of a thinker or leader is that any person can ecompass both of these personaities". I believe that most universities, despite there industrial business appearance, is motivating students to use both of these qualities. It a students choice to give back to the university when he or she become an alumni. He or she learned as a leader but practices that choice as a thinker. To be a "leader" and a "thinker" are two positive things. To make one out to be better than the other is wrong. I feel the ideal student should be a mixture of both. We as students chose our institution based on how we felt they could better prepare us for our future, so we of course should buy in to there teaching methods.

StephenSales, a student blogger, said that if people are going to be successful they gotta have there own understanding of how to do so, which is quite uplifting to think that people should be able to do that but i have to disagree. I f we were to already posses this skills than what is the use of a college. To have this attitude is to exemplify the negative side of a thinker. To believe that you can do something alone is wrong. No should feel that they know how to make it alone because it takes the help of others (universities) to prepare us.

After reading these arguments im am left with the same opinion i had in my last Blog. I believe every university does not have the intention of molding there students into money donating alumni. I believe the teach them there methods because the honestly believe in it as well. All universities teach there students with the goal in mind that they can go out and better the society.
Armani (enter to learn, Leave to Serve)